Sunday, October 31, 2010

This was posted by Getsmart, a fellow PID researcher and guest contributor, on the ATS forum [link]. It is an analysis of the Beatles August 28,1966 LA press conference. As has been discussed in a previous blog post, Was Paul McCartney replaCIAed in August 1966?, I believe this is the first public appearance of Faul as Paul McCartney. Getsmart posits this may also be the Lennon double.

In my opinion, John Lennon's name and image were hijacked to make "him" an ineffectual "leader" of the anti-war movement. In this way, the powers that be could control their opposition. John ONO Lennon and Yoko Ono gave MontyPython-esque interviews against the Vietnam war that made the peace activists look ridiculous, thus discrediting the whole peace movement. This is very similar to how Jim Morrison (the son of the admiral commanding at the false flag Gulf of Tonkin "attack") was planted as a "leader" of the anti-war movement. It just so happens that December 8 is the date for both Jim Morrison's birthday and Lennon's murder.

John Lennon vs. his look-alike double in the 1967 movie, "How I Won the War."

Here is a video of the August 28th, 1966 Los Angeles press conference in which some particularly interesting questions were asked.

After minute 5:00 John replies to the question:"What was the song Eleanor Rigby based upon?"

It is important to realize that this is a song which we now know to have been written on the basis of names on tombstones in St Peters Cemetery where both Paul and John used to roam when they first met. Here is a post which clarifies that John must have known exactly what Eleanor Rigby was based upon, but an impostor couldn't possibly fathom what.Source of The Beatles song Eleanor Rigby

John flippantly replies:"Two queers."

He then seems to be rather bothered by the ensuring hilarity from the crowd. He goes on to interrupt a journalist to correct himself, looking at Paul for a cue, and then says something difficult to make out any better than "Two battle boys" or "Two babble boys," thanks if you can help in deciphering that phrase.

I think that he was referring insultingly to the REAL PAUL and the REAL JOHN whom they have already replaced as their doubles, adding insult to injury by calling them "a couple of queers."

This smacks of "army talk" and does not in any way correspond to the vernacular used by open-minded sixties rebels. Was it because of that giveaway comment that then tried to correct himself? Did he get a signal from a handler to repair his glaring mistake?We have therefore been - and probably since this early date of August 28th, 1966 - in the presence of two impostors posing to the press and the public as the real John Lennon and the real Paul McCartney.

We are obviously not the only ones who noticed strange goings on insofar as The Beatles' identities were concerned, and because of this broad concern among many witnesses, the journalist was then brought to pointedly ask another question - note that this was way back in the summer of 1966:

"Have you ever trained or used Beatle Doubles as DECOYS?

John replies meekly "No... No..." and Paul meekly echoes an identical mimicked "No...No..."and then adds:"We tried to get Brian Epstein to do it, he wouldn't do it."This may well be revealing of why Brian Epstein was assassinated, unwilling he was to assist the murder and replacement of his band members.

In the same press conference video, at minute 6:38 a journalist asks Paul who does Beatles songs the best. Paul looks about as if 'obviously' The Beatles themselves would do Beatles songs the best, but then looks furtively at an equally silent John and embarrassed, he doesn't reply. Obviously they knew they were totally lame as replacement musicians and unable to "do Beatles songs properly," so they both chose to clam up.

At minute 9:41 FAUL gives us his first in a very long series of false identity confessions, with the following statement:

"We know our Real Image which is nothing like our image."

Upon the crowd's uproar he adds loudly:"Forget it !"

Apparently we are not to remember what he says when he has an unconscious lapse. He also possibly thought he'd cleared up his unintentional leak by issuing a 'command' such as those used when coaching mind controlled impostors. Smiling at the crowd, he then looked furtively at someone in the public to his front left, at which time his smile suddenly turns to a frown and he says:"What I meant to say..." followed by silence, hiding his eyes with his hand, not knowing how to get out of his predicament by another statement given that the initiative was not his own but probably commanded by a handler in the audience. John comes to his rescue with another flippant remarks that sounds something like "I like sticks or bricks" although I possibly inaccurately deciphered what John said at minute 10:00.

At minute 12:35 John uses a common impostor 'question avoidance' tactic by replying "No comment" to a simple question about a public statement he had recently made to a journalist and which had been published in the press. Faul, noticing that his response was unsatisfactory and maybe not wanting to be the only one looking like a loser in front of their 'agency impostor handlers' - taunted John saying "Come on, John, tell them what you mean." Thus pressured by his co-conspirator's prompting, John nevertheless was unable to reply to a clear question for any politically structured individual such as John Lennon was purported to be. Here is the question along with John's clueless answer:

QUESTION: "Show Business is an extension of the Jewish religion. Would you mind amplifying that?"

John Lennon:"I mean, you can read into it what you like. It's just a little old statement. I was not very serious about it."

QUESTION: "And those words, how did you piece them together?"

John Lennon:"Oh, I don't know..."

Was John Lennon someone who lent himself to making trivial statements about fundamental political matters? Hardly. On this subject, here is what Texe Marrs confirms:Do The Jews Own Hollywood And The Media?

Let us please remember that this is not the Jewish people nor the Jewish religion, but only a small group of fanatics who have infiltrated several nations among which Israel and the USA and who hide behind judaism to dissimulate their plans which have nothing to do with the welfare of anyone Jewish. They are Zionists, and as our current US Vice-President so eloquently puts it, this has nothing to do with being Jewish. The Zionists are the Illuminati

We know that the Zionists were behind WWII and are fully enmeshed with the CIA and the Illuminati. As evidence, here is how Zionist Jacob Rothschild designed the Israeli Supreme Court filled with Illuminati symbolism, acting in mockery of the honest and honorable citizens of Israel, a Zionist movement that this video says is ANTISEMETIC. The Zionists are Illuminati USURPERS of Judaism

John Lennon obviously knew about this, at least insofar as it extended to the music industry and show business at large. He was quoted by the press for such strong opposition and public statements, which explains why John was replaced, and Paul obviously along with him. John and Paul were rebellious enough for their Agency impostors to find it politically correct in those reactionary times to call them "Two queers". Pardon me if I don't share their sense of humor defiling the dignity of two honorable young men who served humanity with their duty to the TRUTH.

At the end of the Los Angeles video, at minute 14:00 John goes so far as to declare right before turning to Paul laughing:

"You can't always tell the would be's from the real thing."

GS

________________________

Let us remember that

The Beatles were a deeply politicized band, something which was obscured by their drift into mindless psychedelic spaced out apolitical passivity from Sgt Pepper onwards. Today they appear as either naive lyric artists when looking at their early days to an apogee of studio musicians and 64 track mixed sound effects to blow out your mind on drugs. The hard edge was entirely LOBOTOMIZED from their music as if their minds had been removed, something which was apparently done by also removing and replacing their bodies with look-alikes.

Monday, October 25, 2010

Just a quick announcement that Tina Foster will be discussing Paul is Dead, the Beatles, and the 60's on Axxiom Rule of Law Radio on November 12, 2010 from 6:15-7:15 pm CST. A link to the archived show will be posted when available. Stay tuned!

UPDATE:

Tina's interview with Andrew Griffin is now available in the archives.

Saturday, October 9, 2010

Today, October 9, 2010, would have been Beatle John Lennon's 70th birthday. It is a time to celebrate the brilliant musician and author, but it is also a time to remember that there are many unresolved issues surrounding the assassination outside the Dakota Apartments in New York City. Those issues must be addressed if any measure of justice is to be found. The following is a news report from that fateful night - December 8, 1980:

The news report was incorrect that Mark David Chapman was a "local screwball." Chapman was not local at all, but rather flew all the way from Hawaii to be there (making the trip for the second time).

Lennon signing an autograph for Chapman (12/8/80).

There were also discrepancies with other reports how many times Lennon had been shot. This report states that Lennon may have been shot as many as seven times and was dead after the first bullet hit him. The official story is that John was hit by four bullets and that he lived long enough to tell the doorman he was shot and nod to the cop who asked him if he were John Lennon. Oftentimes, the earliest reports of an incident are more accurate. This is because information comes out before the journalists can be informed of the official party line. If Lennon had been struck by seven bullets, that may indicate that a second gunman was involved, which contradicts the official version that Chapman acted alone.

Prior to the murder, Chapman mailed a letter to an Italian address, giving the Dakota as a return address. In 1983, head of security, Mahoney, found the letter. There was a reference to Chapman's "mission" in NYC, which constitutes possible evidence of premeditated murder and conspiracy. The letter vanished and reappeared with the post-date changed to 1981. The "mission" statement was also missing. In addition, Lennon's diaries were stolen and returned later with extra entries and some entries altered and many files were found to have missing contents at Yoko's apartment after Lennon was killed. (Fred Seaman, a Lennon staffer and look-alike, was convicted of stealing personal effects from the Lennon estate).

Dr. Stephen Lynn, the physician who attended to Lennon after he had been shot, admitted evidence had been destroyed. He said everything, including Lennon's bloodstained clothes, was destroyed. He also said the medical records were given to an administrator and put in a vault.

It is most troubling that the hospital destroyed evidence in a murder investigation. The medical records, clothes, and other evidence should have been given to investigators, not put in a vault or destroyed. Destroying evidence in a murder investigation is rendering criminal assistance in the first degree in some states.In a strange twist, Dr. David Halleran says HE was the one who treated Lennon - not Lynn. "[N]either Lynn nor Marks even touched Lennon's body."

Halleran didn't recognize the victim and began trying to restore his vital signs like any other patient. "During this time one of the nurses said, that looks like John Lennon. I said 'No that is not John Lennon,'" Halleran toldCNY Central in 2011.

Because Chapman confessed, what evidence remained was skimmed over in court.

No convincing evidence was presented that Chapman had caused Lennon to turn. Also, this wasn't a trial since Chapman had already confessed. It was simply a sentencing hearing. There was no official testimony or any witnesses. The case was declared closed on the night of the murder, and the police report is lacking in any substantive detail.

Lennon's body was cremated the next day, despite Lennon's "horror of cremation" (according to biographer Albert Goldman). Obviously, this made it impossible to later exhume the body to search for evidence. There are some problems with the theories we have been told about how the shooting went down that an examination may have been able to resolve.

Imagine the theory we've been told: that Lennon had walked past Chapman, who was to the right and then rear of him in the dark entryway. If Chapman had called out, "Mr. Lennon," and John stopped and turned, it was possible though difficult for him to hit Lennon in the left shoulder, and then as Lennon turned to flee, to hit him in the upper left back. Yet Chapman told Judge Dennis Edwards at a sentencing hearing that he didn't say anything to Lennon, just that he fired.

Imagine a second theory: Perdomo or another operative fired from the doorway leading to the service elevator, which was at the left of the walkway and in front of Lennon. There are two series of two shots. First, two shots hit the left shoulder. As Lennon runs towards the lobby stairway, two other shots hit his upper left back. Shooting from that doorway seems a more plausible way to make those hits. Since the autopsy was not made public, we don't know if three of the five shots exited, grazed or missed Lennon to hit the glass lobby door.

Chapman had an interesting background that suggests CIA ties. At 19 (1975), he signed onto the YMCA international camp counselor program and was sent to Beirut where he allegedly received instructions in lethal arts at the CIA training camp. He also worked in Laos at a camp with CIA connections.

Mark White in his political comic strip, Dead Silence in the Brain, reports that as a young man Mark Chapman began working at a Laotian refugee camp. The camp was run by World Vision, an evangelical charity which runs refugee camps worldwide. It has assisted in numerous CIA operations. Its camps along the Honduran border, for instance, were used to recruit the death squads of El Salvador . . . Researcher John Judge writes, "World Vision appears to be an elaborate cover for the recruitment, training and placement of assassins worldwide."

After he shot Lennon, Chapman sat and waited for the police, reading the book, The Catcher in the Rye by J.D. Salinger (which just happens to be about phonies). John Hinckley, Jr., Reagan's would-be assassin, was also carrying a copy of this book. Salinger, apparently, had extensive ties to the CIA. The doorman at the Dakota that night was a CIA trained assassin who had been involved in the Bay of Pigs invasion in 1961.

According to Cuban Information Archives and Salvador Austucia, author of Rethinking John Lennon's Assassination, Perdomo was also known as "Joaquin Sanjenis," and "Sam Jenis." He was mostly known as an anti-Castro Cuban exile and a member of Brigade 2506 during the Bay of Pigs Invasion in 1961, a miserably failed CIA operation, which cost Company Head Allan Dulles his job, and maybe John F. Kennedy his life, also by a mythic lone gunman, who turned out to play patsy, too...

Imagine Perdomo had reason to insist Mark was the man. Perdomo, aka Sanjenis, had worked side by side, ah yes, with convicted and now deceased Watergate burglar Frank Sturgis for about a decade on the CIA payroll...

[T]he doorman on duty, one Jose Perdomo, supposedly screamed "Leave! Get out of here!" Then he asked Chapman, "Do you know what you've done?" "I just shot John Lennon," Chapman said matter-of-factly. Then we're told, Chapman threw down his gun, took off his coat, folded it at his feet, and calmly started reading a paperback, Catcher in the Rye. Perdomo kicked the gun away. One wonders why Perdomo told him to leave, after reminding him of his crime. Perhaps Perdomo was the shooter and planted the gun.

Fenton Bresler concludes in his book, The Murder of John Lennon, that the CIA killed Lennonusing Chapman as a mind-controlled assassin. According to Alex Constantine, Chapman testified "I can hear their thoughts, I can hear them talking, but not from the outside, from the inside." This sounds like mind-control technology.

So I don't think Chapman was picked from a hat from the general population. I think he had had intense behavioral conditioning for the Lennon assassination, though I don't think he was the triggerman. I believe he was too much of a risk as a Manchurian Candidate, even at close range. So Perdomo & Associates lent a helping hand.

Bresler believed Lennon was publicly executed because the new Reagan administration was worried about his becoming politically active and being able to unite the people to create positive change. Lennon "was more influential than any head of state in the world." RCA (headed by "General" David Sarnoff)

was EMI's silent partner, and also active in military and space electronics and satellite communications. It was subsequently acquired by General Electric... It was a classic example of what President Dwight Eisenhower would have called the "military industrial complex," producing even the rebellious Beatles for a buck, so long as the boys kept their place.

[Source: Jerry Mazza, "On the 25th anniversary of John Lennon's assassination, imagine..." Online Journal, Dec 7, 2005] EMI (Electrical and Musical Industries) was "also a military contractor to the British War Office. So a high-ranking American official could make a call to a high-ranking British official and complain about this Lennon fellow ramping up American youth against government policy." [Id.]

But apart from any possible future threat Lennon may or may not have posed to the Reagan regime, Lennon did reveal in a 1980 Playboy interview how the government used LSD to control people. From "Harrison Stabbing & Masonic Symbolism" by NewsHawk:

Lennon was murdered shortly after he gave an interview to Playboy magazine in which he blew the lid off the fact that the Beatles were part of massive experimentation in social control/engineering unleashed by Tavistock and intelligence agencies, as was the deliberate introduction of drugs like LSD into the burgeoning "counterculture" scene during the 1960s and 1970s

LENNON: ... We must always remember to thank the CIA and the Army for LSD. That's what people forget. Everything is the opposite of what it is, isn't it, Harry? So get out the bottle, boy... and relax. They invented LSD to control people and what they did was give us freedom. Sometimes it works in mysterious ways its wonders to perform. If you look in the Government reports on acid, the ones who jumped out the window or killed themselves because of it, I think even with Art Linkletter's daughter, it happened to her years later. So, let's face it, she wasn't really on acid when she jumped out the window...

Was the release of this information what prompted the assassination?

Another issue that the interview raises is that Dr. Lynn was Lennon's neighbor and saw him regularly but did not know who it was until he opened the wallet. The nurse at the hospital said it did not look anything like John Lennon, and even laughed at the suggestion. There was no suggestion that Lennon's face had been injured, so why was he so hard to recognize? In the article, I don't believe in Featles: CIAlebrity impersonator, "John Lennon", I suggested that Lennon had actually been replaced, and the person who was assassinated (or mock assassinated) was an impostor. Recently, a set of Lennon's fingerprints was seized by the FBI in New York (on October 6, 2010).

"Peter Siegel, co-founder of GOTTA HAVE IT!, the shop selling the fingerprint card, said he was bewildered by the FBI action and interest during the week also by Homeland Security." Siegel said, "This great icon has been deceased for 30 years... This is not a national threat." [Source: FBI seizes John Lennon’s fingerprints in N.Y.] However, if Lennon had been replaced, it would make sense that "they" would not want sets of fingerprints floating around that could prove beyond a shadow of a doubt that John, too, had been the victim of impostor-replacement.

The corpse of Faux Lennon:

Note the longer, pointier nose and smaller chin

There are some interesting clues pointing to Lennon's death that appear years before. These clues suggest that John's death had been planned ahead - or had already occurred.

The "Magical Mystery Tour" album was released on December 8, 1967. There is a sign in the movie of the same name that says "The best way to go is by M&DC." 13 years to the day after the release of this album, a man with the initials M.D.C. was presented as his assassin.

The sign above the M&DC reference reads: "Extra (or Exit?) Brighton" It just so happens that Brighton is the final resting place of Aleister Crowley (British Secret Service agent and Satanist).

An actor named Mark Lindsay Chapman was cast to play John Lennon in a 2007 movie called "Chapter 27."

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0152464/

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0488988/

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0152464/resume

The location of the Lennon assassination was at the Dakota building. It became a national historic landmark on December 8, 1976. [source] Lennon (or his double) was killed exactly four years later.

The Dakota was where the movie, "Rosemary's Baby," was filmed in 1968. The movie was about Satanism and murder. In 1977, Chapman became a Satanist.

[The] Dakota Apartments had been portrayed by filmmaker Roman Polanski in the 1960s as a den of Satanic cult activity (in his film Rosemary’s Baby). Not long before Lennon’s murder, Chapman had approached occult filmmaker Kenneth Anger and offered him a gift of live bullets. Just days after Lennon was felled, Anger’s long-delayed final cut of Lucifer Rising made its New York debut, not far from the bloodstained grounds of the Dakota Apartments...

The Dakota apartment being linked to Satanism could be a clue that intelligence agencies were involved, since they use Satanism as a cover for their activities:

... One of the points that we've tried to make, throughout the course of our discussion of *The Ultimate Evil*, is that, again, the *Satanism* is one of the things that throws people off. The intelligence agencies have *long* used occult groups as a front for activity. For one thing, occult groups exist at the periphery of public scrutiny and therefore are ideal to use as intelligence fronts. In addition to that, because of the unusual activities of occult groups, any suspicious activity on the part of an intelligence agent *using* these groups could be laid simply to the bizarre nature of the group itself. [CN -- also, first amendment protections for "religious" freedom would help shield them from investigation.] Now specifically, vis a vis mind control, many, many of the cults on the scene today are, in fact, mind-control fronts for the U.S. Intelligence and Military communities.